What's next for Terrell Suggs?The Baltimore sack specialist is currently scheduled to count $12.4 million towards the salary cap in 2014. Joel CorryPrint ThisJANUARY 10, 2014, 02:01 PM ESTBaltimore Ravens general manager Ozzie Newsome sent a message to Terrell Suggs during Wednesday’s annual after-the-season “State of the Ravens” address. He was noncommittal on Suggs remaining in Baltimore because the 2011 Defensive Player of the Year’s $12.4 million 2014 salary cap number needs to be addressed. Suggs’ future will be a topic of discussion when the Ravens’ brain trust meets next week at owner Steve Biscotti’s Florida home.

In all likelihood, the Ravens will attempt to work out a contract extension with Suggs which gives them some 2014 cap relief. Suggs is entering the final year of a six-year, $62.5 million contract (with $37.1 million guaranteed) after posting 10 sacks and 80 tackles in a Pro Bowl season. The 31-year-old was an early Defensive Player of the Year candidate because of a strong start, but disappeared during the second half of the season. Suggs only had one sack and 20 tackles in the last eight games.

Newsome demonstrated last year that he is willing to part ways with key older players if it doesn’t make sense financially to keep them. 33-year-old Anquan Boldin was traded to the San Francisco 49ers for a 2013 sixth-round pick after he refused to take a $2 million paycut off of his $6 million salary. The Ravens also didn’t make much of an effort to re-sign 35-year-old Ed Reed, a nine-time Pro Bowler, during free agency.

Suggs must recognize that a new extension will average less that his current deal ($10,416,667 per year) because he is on the wrong side of 30. Julius Peppers is the only pass rusher making over $10 million per year on a contract signed after reaching the age of 30. Robert Mathis (Indianapolis Colts) and Chris Clemons (Seattle Seahawks) are next with deals averaging $9 million per year.

Terrell SuggsSuggs has notched 37 sacks over his last 56 games.It was a soft market for older pass rushers in free agency last winter. Dwight Freeney’s two-year, $8.75 million contract (worth a maximum of $13.35 million through escalators and incentives) from the San Diego Chargers and the two-year, $8.5 million contract (with an additional $3.75 million in escalators) Osi Umenyiora received from the Atlanta Falcons paced this market. John Abraham’s $5 million per year price tag and demand of extensive playtime turned off several teams. The 35-year-old signed a two-year, $4.6 million deal (plus a $750,000 base salary escalator) with the Arizona Cardinals when training camp started.

The best situation for both sides may be an extension for Suggs averaging slightly more than the deal Elvis Dumervil signed with the Ravens after the paperwork snafu on his renegotiated Denver Broncos contract led to his release. Dumervil signed a five-year, $26 million deal (includes $11 million in guarantees) with an $8.5 million 2013 salary. The contract is worth up to $35 million because it contains $7 million in base salary escalators and $2 million in incentives primarily based on consistently reaching 12 sacks in a season.

The Ravens shouldn’t have a problem with Suggs’ $7.8 million 2014 salary remaining the same or increasing slightly given Dumervil’s first year salary. For example, the Ravens could create $5.05 million of much needed 2014 cap room on a three-year, $18 million extension where Suggs receives a $7 million signing bonus with a $1 million 2014 base salary. The Ravens are approximately $7 million under the projected $126.3 million 2014 salary cap once tenders for exclusive rights players and restricted free agents are factored into the equation. Suggs would get $200,000 more than he is scheduled to make in 2014 with a $7.35 million cap number. $6 million in base salary escalators and incentives with the same 12 sacks threshold as Dumervil could be included so that Suggs could earn a maximum of $24 million in new money during the deal.

Suggs needs to be comfortable with the dynamics of the older pass rusher market if he rejects a reasonable offer from the Ravens. If not, he could initially price himself out of the market when he finds out that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side.

Suggs fell off bad in the second half of the year. Only one sack in seven games and I watched a few Baltimore games in the latter part of the year. He was non-existent in big games against Detroit and New England. He might be damaged goods, so I wouldn’t even bother taking a chance on him. As AJ said, why sign an aging vet? Not everyone can be John Abraham and still play at a high level at age 36.

We don't need any old guys from other teams, we are going to draft Barr and use him as a hybrid DE/OLB, put him with Osi, Bierman, and Mass and we are all set. We need to resign guys that have proven they work in our system such as Babs first, then spend our FA money on signing 1-2 starting offensive linemen.

_________________When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!

Hmmm... That wouldn't be a bad signing by Atlanta. Especially if they utilize him like they did Abraham by rotating him in and out of the lineup for pass rushing scenarios.

I'm curious as to whether or not Suggs still thinks he's worth top dollar despite his age?

I'd trade Osi for Suggs.

Enough aging veterans who come in here to collect a paycheck. We need young talent.

I would disagree. Atlanta had the most rookie snaps of any NFL team last year. This team is pretty young at most positions overall.

The team is in semi-rebuild mode. Those rookies got their feet wet and will be better this year. It would be foolish to add an aging veteran at this point. It would only slow the developement of the younger guys,.

What younger guys? You mean Jonathan Massaquoi and Malliciah Goodman, who are basically rotational DEs?

You guys do realize that even if the Falcons do get a good pass rusher in this year's draft, that traditionally DEs take 2-3 years to develop and impact. Players like Von Miller & Aldon Smith are rare in terms of guys that come in right away and are instant successes as pass rushers. Most guys are more like Chris Long, Robert Quinn, JPP, etc. where they sort of have 1 or 2 years trying to feel their ways out. More than likely even if the Falcons get a good pass rusher at the top of this year's draft, it won't be until 2016 before he really hits his stride as a pass rusher.

Unlike Osi, Suggs is actually still a capable pass rusher. He's also a valuable leader and brings a lot of personality to this franchise. He knows Mike Nolan, is a much better fit for the role than Osi. Fact is, he's a year younger than Osi, and more than likely the Falcons are going to keep Osi as a situational pass rusher anyway.

I'm not saying that the Falcons should be falling over themselves to get Suggs and give him some $30 million contract. But if they get into a position where they can sign T-Sizzle to a deal similar to what other DEs signed this offseason: a 2-yr. deal worth between $6-8M, then you goddamn right they should pull the trigger on that move!

Having Terrell Suggs on the roster isn't going to stop players like Goodman/Massaquoi from developing. That's one of the biggest misconceptions that people have. Outside the QB position, the belief that you need as many reps as possible in order to improve your game is vastly overrated by most people. Massaquoi doesn't need to get 45 reps per game to become a good player. Frankly, he'd probably become better if he only had 25-30.

What younger guys? You mean Jonathan Massaquoi and Malliciah Goodman, who are basically rotational DEs?

You guys do realize that even if the Falcons do get a good pass rusher in this year's draft, that traditionally DEs take 2-3 years to develop and impact. Players like Von Miller & Aldon Smith are rare in terms of guys that come in right away and are instant successes as pass rushers. Most guys are more like Chris Long, Robert Quinn, JPP, etc. where they sort of have 1 or 2 years trying to feel their ways out. More than likely even if the Falcons get a good pass rusher at the top of this year's draft, it won't be until 2016 before he really hits his stride as a pass rusher.

Unlike Osi, Suggs is actually still a capable pass rusher. He's also a valuable leader and brings a lot of personality to this franchise. He knows Mike Nolan, is a much better fit for the role than Osi. Fact is, he's a year younger than Osi, and more than likely the Falcons are going to keep Osi as a situational pass rusher anyway.

I'm not saying that the Falcons should be falling over themselves to get Suggs and give him some $30 million contract. But if they get into a position where they can sign T-Sizzle to a deal similar to what other DEs signed this offseason: a 2-yr. deal worth between $6-8M, then you goddamn right they should pull the trigger on that move!

Having Terrell Suggs on the roster isn't going to stop players like Goodman/Massaquoi from developing. That's one of the biggest misconceptions that people have. Outside the QB position, the belief that you need as many reps as possible in order to improve your game is vastly overrated by most people. Massaquoi doesn't need to get 45 reps per game to become a good player. Frankly, he'd probably become better if he only had 25-30.

What he said.

Atlanta needs a couple more veterans on both sides of the ball IMO. Most the rookies that got extra snaps where due to either a.) injuries or b.) in place of veterans that are likely not returning next year.

Any good NFL team needs a balance of veterans/leaders and rookies/younger players. I think the teams still in the post season today exemplify this balance (maybe with exception to Seattle which runs a little younger).

Atlanta needs to find that balance but with better veteran players like Suggs not like Osi. Guys that can teach the younger players how it's done in the NFL and be a mentor while still being able to produce on the field. I don't expect Suggs to put up crazy numbers and yes he is in decline but we all said the same thing of Abraham and he's still destroying offensive lines and racking up sacks.

I think Suggs could be more of what Abe was for Atlanta than what we've had with Osi. Above and beyond that Suggs is the perfect fit for this defense. He's is a hybrid DE/LB much like Bierman who was enjoying a good amount of success for his skill level with the hybrid defense that Atlanta runs.

I think if you get Suggs, draft Barr, and get Bierman back at full health next year Atlanta could have a fairly nasty pass rush that really fits the hybrid scheme that Nolan runs.

Atlanta needs a couple more veterans on both sides of the ball IMO. Most the rookies that got extra snaps where due to either a.) injuries or b.) in place of veterans that are likely not returning next year.

Respectfully disagree. Nobody wants to here it, but we are in rebuild mode. IMO, veterans can be brought in to make the extra push to get you over the hump into Super Bowl contention. That was last year for us. That window has closed.

Quote:

Any good NFL team needs a balance of veterans/leaders and rookies/younger players

Agree. But they will be high character, low minutes kind of guys. An extra coach if you will. Not someone who's going to have a big contract and chew up big minutes.

Quote:

I think if you get Suggs, draft Barr, and get Bierman back at full health next year Atlanta could have a fairly nasty pass rush that really fits the hybrid scheme that Nolan runs.

That's asking an awful lot to go right. Is suggs more Abe or more Osi and Hartwell? When does the "Beerman" come back? Does the "Beerman" come back at 100%? Barr or any other rookie is just that....a rookie. You don't know what you're going to get.

I don't think there are any really easy solutions to our problems, but I do see us getting younger and faster....whether that is the answer or the right way, we shall see.

Suggs isn't going to go for 2 years and 6-8 million total, if he did I'd be fine bringing him in. He's season totals were still solid, and I'm sure his agent will say he was banged up in the second half. Abe will teach teams the potential value they are leaving on the table, if Suggs gets cut, which is still a big if, I think he will get more like 3 years 18 million.

_________________When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!

I think if you get Suggs, draft Barr, and get Bierman back at full health next year Atlanta could have a fairly nasty pass rush that really fits the hybrid scheme that Nolan runs.

That's asking an awful lot to go right. Is suggs more Abe or more Osi and Hartwell? When does the "Beerman" come back? Does the "Beerman" come back at 100%? Barr or any other rookie is just that....a rookie. You don't know what you're going to get.

It's the same gamble you take by letting Abe go and signing Osi. It is entirely possible that Osi was the one that had a big bounce back year and Abe started to tail off into oblivion. That isn't what happened and hindsight is always better.

Sometimes you need to take a risk (usually calculated). Atlanta would be gambling on a couple factors:

- Suggs' 2nd half drop off is a blip and not a trend.- Bierman will indeed bounce back to form (and there is no indicator that won't happen).- Barr turns out to be a good NFL prospect.- They get Babs back and there is more in the tank than we thought.- Worrilow & Joplo aren't one year wonders.

I'd rather have Michael Bennett but he is going to cost significantly more and I wouldn't really consider him a leadership type and it possible he gets tagged. Bennett doesn't give the Falcons the flexibility that Suggs gives them either.

Almost every move in the NFL a lot has to go right for it to pay off. That is why I said you COULD have a fairly nasty pass rush. Not that we will if all that happens.

Suggs isn't going to go for 2 years and 6-8 million total, if he did I'd be fine bringing him in. He's season totals were still solid, and I'm sure his agent will say he was banged up in the second half. Abe will teach teams the potential value they are leaving on the table, if Suggs gets cut, which is still a big if, I think he will get more like 3 years 18 million.

You're probably right. Dumervil got 5 yrs $26M from the Ravens last year, so I'd suspect that is the ballpark Suggs will be seeking although likely shorter deal (3 yrs as you say).

Just disagreeing with the notion that just because he's old means that Suggs isn't worth our time. To me its silly to say things like "we're rebuilding so we shouldn't sign old guys."

You need 4 guys. You have 2 right now. 2 spots are available. And it's silly to have an age limit on them. Especially given the likelihood that whoever you draft isn't going to hit the ground running. Of signing an older and cheap veteran can help bridge the gap between now and then, and in the meantime can give you all the things you were hoping to get from Osi and more, then for the right price why not?

Suggs isn't going to go for 2 years and 6-8 million total, if he did I'd be fine bringing him in. He's season totals were still solid, and I'm sure his agent will say he was banged up in the second half. Abe will teach teams the potential value they are leaving on the table, if Suggs gets cut, which is still a big if, I think he will get more like 3 years 18 million.

You're probably right. Dumervil got 5 yrs $26M from the Ravens last year, so I'd suspect that is the ballpark Suggs will be seeking although likely shorter deal (3 yrs as you say).

Just disagreeing with the notion that just because he's old means that Suggs isn't worth our time. To me its silly to say things like "we're rebuilding so we shouldn't sign old guys."

You need 4 guys. You have 2 right now. 2 spots are available. And it's silly to have an age limit on them. Especially given the likelihood that whoever you draft isn't going to hit the ground running. Of signing an older and cheap veteran can help bridge the gap between now and then, and in the meantime can give you all the things you were hoping to get from Osi and more, then for the right price why not?

I never said we shouldn't sign "old guys". Just saying we should stay away from the Suggs type. He ain't gonna come cheap and he isn't gonna wanna get off the field. This team as it stands now isn't a "stop gap" type of player away. If TD and the brain trust thinks it is, they are wrong. That window is now closed. The defense is in full rebuild mode....get good, reliable, vet's who know they are there more for coaching the young bucks and not logging heavy minutes, not ex-superstars in the twighlights of their careers who just can't do it any longer.

While I agree that the Falcons can't be of the mindset of trying to get that last little push over the hump when it comes to this offseason and others, I don't quite agree we're in "full rebuild" mode.

The Falcons need to draft well, and need to center their off seasons for the foreseeable future on drafting well, and doing their best to get as much young talent in those drafts as possible. This defense does need to be rebuilt, but it really just needs 2 or 3 big-time playmakers on the D-line and a FS that can team with Willy Mo for the next 2 or so years before we have to replace him. For the better long-term future, it'll be great if all of those are young studs in the draft. But the reality is that the Falcons won't be able to get all of those things in 1 offseason. It'll likely take at least 2 off seasons to acquire said players, and that's assuming that Spoon, Trufant, Alford, Worrilow, and Peters don't regress moving forward and can be counted on to be 5 core pieces of our 11-man defensive unit for the next 5 or so years.

Why are you turning away sacks just because a guy has passed some arbitrary age limit? Look, you're right in that Suggs is probably going to be out of the price range where he would be a worthwhile signing for us.

But that's not what you and Dave originally said. You originally said, "No Old Guys Allowed." The Falcons need to be focused on getting better players on defense, PERIOD, regardless of their age. And if a guy is 32, then it's going to change what is the "right price" for him as opposed to someone that is 27 or 22.

The Falcons need to draft well, and need to center their off seasons for the foreseeable future on drafting well, and doing their best to get as much young talent in those drafts as possible. This defense does need to be rebuilt, but it really just needs 2 or 3 big-time playmakers on the D-line and a FS that can team with Willy Mo for the next 2 or so years before we have to replace him. For the better long-term future, it'll be great if all of those are young studs in the draft. But the reality is that the Falcons won't be able to get all of those things in 1 offseason. It'll likely take at least 2 off seasons to acquire said players, and that's assuming that Spoon, Trufant, Alford, Worrilow, and Peters don't regress moving forward and can be counted on to be 5 core pieces of our 11-man defensive unit for the next 5 or so years.

Quote:

I don't quite agree we're in "full rebuild" mode.

So, two rookie corners last year, sprinkle in a rookie LB, plus you want three D-lineman and a FS on defense ? That's 7 new faces out of a possible 11 positions. If that doesn't qualify for full rebuild mode on the defense, I don't know what does.

Perhaps in your eyes. Full rebuild mode IMO is what Jacksonville is going through. They are a team that is looking to establish a core of players. They are a team that has no aspirations to win a Super Bowl, instead their first step is to get to .500, then make the playoffs, etc. Full rebuild mode is when you spurn the "win now" for several years in order to just add players that can get you out of the cellar.

Matt Ryan is going to be 29 a week after the draft. The Falcons can't afford to twist in the wind for a couple of years.

I don't think the Falcons are a player or two away from the Super Bowl, but at the same time I don't think the Falcons should not sign older players because of that. And because of the number of needs on defense, you can't simply turn away players that are potentially stopgaps.

For example, if you want to cut Thomas DeCoud this offseason, in an ideal world you'll get a young stud FS to replace him in the draft. But that likely only happens if you use a Top 50 pick on that position, which given our needs at OL and DL isn't likely (not to mention, I've heard this isn't a great safety class). Second best scenario is signing a top-level FA like Jairus Byrd. But guess what? Byrd could easily take a bunch of $$$$ from another team over you. So then you're left with a dilemma if you're Atlanta, do you overpay for a lesser FA like Chris Clemons, Major Wright, or Stevie Brown? Do you keep DeCoud because the devil you know is better than the devil you don't?

Now if the safety market is like the CB market last year where you have a bunch of quality starters signing low-level 1 yr. deals (e.g. Grimes, Cason, DRC, Talib), then it makes sense to take one of those 2nd tier safeties on the relative cheap.

But if that doesn't happen, then maybe the best option instead of keeping a limited player like DeCoud, it might be getting a veteran like Ed Reed, Charles Woodson, Ryan Clark, or Jim Leonhard to a cheap 1 yr deal. They're all 1 yr stopgaps and if healthy have the potential to be upgrades over DeCoud.

If they work out, you've just plugged a hole for 1 season and hopefully the FS market is better next year via free agency/draft. If they don't, then you didn't overpay an average player $5 million. It's no different for DeCoud, who even if you keep is basically working on a 1-yr. $5 million contract, that if he doesn't bounce back and have a Pro Bwol season in 2014, you're going to be once again looking to cut him. So if the alternative is signing Woodson to a 1-yr. $2.5 million deal. Why not?

Matt Ryan is going to be 29 a week after the draft. The Falcons can't afford to twist in the wind for a couple of years.

I agree. But it certainly looks like the direction we are heading in. The answer will be determioned when we see who TD signs or doesn't sign.

Quote:

But if that doesn't happen, then maybe the best option instead of keeping a limited player like DeCoud, it might be getting a veteran like Ed Reed, Charles Woodson, Ryan Clark, or Jim Leonhard to a cheap 1 yr deal. They're all 1 yr stopgaps and if healthy have the potential to be upgrades over DeCoud

I understand where you are coming from Pudge. Most if not all teams do it this way for the most part. But IMO, all it does is delay the process. We'll still need young talent at some point, and we need that young talent to play. We'll see growing pains and mistakes for sure, but we are no longer title contenders at this point. Experience for the young guys will serve us well in the long haul.

As I said, we will see where the brain trust thinks this team is on who they sign.....

But IMO, all it does is delay the process. We'll still need young talent at some point, and we need that young talent to play. We'll see growing pains and mistakes for sure, but we are no longer title contenders at this point. Experience for the young guys will serve us well in the long haul.

I understand that, but I think you're talking "in general" rather than specific to this team.

I agree, young guys getting increased reps is valuable, but with the caveat that they are in fact good to begin with. For example, Paul Worrilow has the potential to be a quality NFL starting MLB and thus getting him reps early and often is potentially valuable because it increases the chances he develops into a Paul Posluzny/Curtis Lofton-caliber of player. OTOH, Zeke Motta at best is basically a less athletic version of Tom Zbikowski, who is just an above average backup safety. So getting him reps isn't particularly valuable, because even if he hits his maximum potential it won't be that worthwhile.

Remember D-linemen rotate. And this is an important distinction especially since we're talking about the DL rather than any other position on defense. Asante Samuel playing, limits the reps that worthwhile young CBs like McClain/Alford get because you don't typically rotate CBs and generally speaking unless this team is going to play more dime, you only have 3 spots available. So if you have 4 good CBs, someone is going to be left twisting in the wind.

Not the case with DL, where you're going to rotate 6 guys extensively, and have 2 others more than likely that will draw some reps (to keep the other 6 fresh). You need 8 guys, and a lot of NFL rosters will keep 9-10 guys with 1-2 guys stashed on the inactive list or IR or whatever just to bolster depth further.

And the issue the Falcons face is there is really only 4-5 DL on their roster that have proven they are worth keeping/playing a la Worrilow: Massaquoi, Goodman, Biermann, Peters, and Babineaux. But even Babs is just a 1-yr. stopgap. He can still add value as a rotational DT. In the ideal scenario in 2014, he'll be a situational 30-40 snap player rather than the full-time starter that got 50-60 snaps this past year.

But as for Massaquoi & Goodman, they are 2 players that might develop into viable starters, but might not. It's really a coin toss. And if we're judging by what limited things we've seen through their first and second years, it would likely indicate that both are ideally suited to be situational players rather than long-term starters.

The rest of the Falcons DL roster: Jerry, Osi, Matthews, Maponga, Robertson, and Replogle can essentially kick rocks. Not to say I'm writing off guys like Maponga/Matthews/Robertson, because they could still become capable role players. But they are essentially more like Zeke Motta, in that in all likelihood they won't amount to much. And there's no reason for the Falcons to move forward expecting them to.

Take for instance a team like Seattle, who arguably has the best DL in the entire league. Here was their 8 man rotation last year:

Long-term the goal is for the Falcons to have a similar rotation, where our backups (e.g. Avril, Bennett) could start on many teams.

You're the Falcons, and you have 2 players (Biermann & Peters) coming off Achilles tears. And while that is not as devastating an injury as it once was, you can't assume everything is going to be hunky dory. So therefore, you're now down from 5 viable DL to 3. And again that 3rd guy is Babineaux, who you're essentially "wringing the cloth" hoping to get the last few drops of production out of him next year and possibly the year after.

So now you're stuck with Massaquoi and Goodman that are all you have left. If they are your backups, why is that a problem? I bring up the Seahawks, because the analogue for them are basically Cliff Avril for Massaquoi (i.e. situational pass rusher) and Red Bryant for Goodman (i.e. situational run defender). If Biermann comes back and is your Bruce Irvin hybrid guy, then you still need to find a Chris Clemons and Michael Bennett. Now if I had my druthers, the Michael Bennett analogue would in fact be Michael Bennett. But let's say that instead, you peg your top pick to be that guy (e.g. Anthony Barr). That still leaves the door open for a Chris Clemons that can start and be a productive every down player. Is that Terrell Suggs? Maybe, maybe not but regardless the point is that if you think he (or any veteran) can be that guy for even 1 year, then why aren't you signing him? Because it's still 1 year of Chris Clemons when the alternative is nothing.

And unless you think Maponga or another one of these young DL is going to be that Chris Clemons type, there is no downside to adding that veteran. And Maponga hasn't shown anything in the past 6 months to suggest he is that player, and given his draft status, the odds are less than 10% that he does become that player.

Now in the case of a player like Massaquoi, there is a much larger possibility he becomes that player because he's shown ability and is much more talented than your run of the mill 5th round DE. But it's still at best a 50/50 proposition (I'd honestly say it's close to 25/75). But at no point should the team be hinging their success on that still unlikelihood. And because he's a DE, it's not like Suggs presence is going to make him go from potentially getting 50 snaps in 2014 to getting 0 snaps. It's more likely that he'll go from 50 to 30. And if he's any good, he'll show it in those 30.

What I equate your stance to be is "No, we shouldn't sign 'Chris Clemons' because he's too old." And IMO that's just silly. Even if it's 1 year, if you can get the equivalent of Chris Clemons production then it's worthwhile, regardless of that players age. I agree that it should ideally be some young guy that takes that spot, but where is that young player coming? 2nd round? 3rd round? 4th round? Massaquoi? Maponga? Goodman? Essentially you can still get Suggs (your Clemons equivalent in this scenario), get whatever production and still keep guys like Massaquoi, Maponga, Goodman, and whatever rookies. And what is the downside of that? What is the downside of having what is now a very deep DL?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum